6 ms·

I don't see any reason to bring the IoT buzzword into this - but I am not a marketing guy. Standard OpenShift (Ok, I will try to refrain from profanity) is extr

I don't see any reason to bring the IoT buzzword into this - but I am not a marketing guy. Standard OpenShift (Ok, I will try to refrain from profanity) is extremely resource intensive even for most fat enterprise environments. They could have just one product based off of what they are calling MicroShift - less resource usage, modular to the core so customers can add precisely what they need - some will use the IoT profile, some will use minimal-enterprise and so on. Right now they just try to smother you with lot of baggage and burden and their solution to everything is run a managed one in AWS - i.e. dictate the choices. I just never liked the idea of taking something like open source k8s and creating a Redhat specific version that requires different treatment and whole lot of other enterprise stuff including RHEL. And it doesn't work all that better than GKE or EKS or even building your own cluster (I have done all 3.) They should have just created tooling around standard K8s and allowed customers to use the good parts - deployment workflows, s2i etc. basically plugging the gaps on top of standard k8s. I can totally see lot of customers seeing value in that.

hosteur 5y ago
That would be a much better product for the users. But not for the business. Less vendor lock-in.
- aspenmayer 5y ago
  Better still for the business to make a product that people use!
nullify88 5y ago
I'm running both OpenShift and k3s in production, and there isnt that much that requires different treatment between the two. There are some specific OpenShift APIs (like routes which are terrible) and some quality of life improvements (service-ca signer) but nothing drastic.
- blinkingled 5y ago
  Have you tried running istio for example in an enterprise env - they needed you to install a RH specific older version and IIRC that wasn't just for support. I could list some more things if I recalled hard enough.
- m3adow 5y ago
  > like routes which are terrible Huh, interesting. What do you not like about routes? My team is providing an IaaS solution for internal developers in my company and a lot developers seemes to have less problems with Openshifts service exposition abstraction (Routes) in contrast to pure Kubernetes.
  - freedomben 5y ago
    Routes are of the biggest things I miss when I'm on vanilla K8s. I don't see how anybody could prefer Ingress to Routes, but to each their own.
  - nullify88 5y ago
    A big inconvenience is that for HTTP2 Routes or edge / re-encrypt Routes with a custom TLS certificate, the TLS certificate and keys must be inline in the Route resource instead of referencing a secret like Ingress resources do. I think this is a big oversight where Routes mix secrets and Ingress configuration together. It makes GitOps annoying because I don't want to treat the whole Route resource as a secret that needs to be encrypted or stored in vault. Do I also then treat Route resources as sensitive and deny some users access on the account they could contain private keys? I also have to worry about keeping the route updated before certificates expire instead of having it taken care of by cert-manager. So we use Traefik's IngressRoute.
    - m3adow 5y ago
      That I can relate to. For us, there's only one dev team which uses HTTP2 (financial industry, so HTTP2 is still seen as "new = beta") and encountered that problem. I have no idea how they solved it though.
      - nullify88 5y ago
        FWIW, although I've known for a while that OpenShift coverts ingress resources to routes, I just found out that the Ingress Controller sets up a watch on the secretref which keeps the inline TLS in the Route in sync. That could be enough for some people.
freedomben 5y ago
> I don't see any reason to bring the IoT buzzword into this IoT is certainly a buzzword, but it also does have real meaning, and this product is aimed squarely at the IoT edge devices themselves. Seems quite appropriate to use the term IoT to describe it.

hosteur 5y ago

That would be a much better product for the users. But not for the business. Less vendor lock-in.

aspenmayer 5y ago
Better still for the business to make a product that people use!

nullify88 5y ago

I'm running both OpenShift and k3s in production, and there isnt that much that requires different treatment between the two. There are some specific OpenShift APIs (like routes which are terrible) and some quality of life improvements (service-ca signer) but nothing drastic.

blinkingled 5y ago
Have you tried running istio for example in an enterprise env - they needed you to install a RH specific older version and IIRC that wasn't just for support. I could list some more things if I recalled hard enough.
m3adow 5y ago
> like routes which are terrible Huh, interesting. What do you not like about routes? My team is providing an IaaS solution for internal developers in my company and a lot developers seemes to have less problems with Openshifts service exposition abstraction (Routes) in contrast to pure Kubernetes.
- freedomben 5y ago
  Routes are of the biggest things I miss when I'm on vanilla K8s. I don't see how anybody could prefer Ingress to Routes, but to each their own.
- nullify88 5y ago
  A big inconvenience is that for HTTP2 Routes or edge / re-encrypt Routes with a custom TLS certificate, the TLS certificate and keys must be inline in the Route resource instead of referencing a secret like Ingress resources do. I think this is a big oversight where Routes mix secrets and Ingress configuration together. It makes GitOps annoying because I don't want to treat the whole Route resource as a secret that needs to be encrypted or stored in vault. Do I also then treat Route resources as sensitive and deny some users access on the account they could contain private keys? I also have to worry about keeping the route updated before certificates expire instead of having it taken care of by cert-manager. So we use Traefik's IngressRoute.
  - m3adow 5y ago
    That I can relate to. For us, there's only one dev team which uses HTTP2 (financial industry, so HTTP2 is still seen as "new = beta") and encountered that problem. I have no idea how they solved it though.
    - nullify88 5y ago
      FWIW, although I've known for a while that OpenShift coverts ingress resources to routes, I just found out that the Ingress Controller sets up a watch on the secretref which keeps the inline TLS in the Route in sync. That could be enough for some people.

freedomben 5y ago

> I don't see any reason to bring the IoT buzzword into this IoT is certainly a buzzword, but it also does have real meaning, and this product is aimed squarely at the IoT edge devices themselves. Seems quite appropriate to use the term IoT to describe it.